Scottish Parliament

Written Answers

Tuesday 8 February 2000

Scottish Executive

Agriculture

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what resources were granted to agri-environment schemes in 1998-99 and 1999-2000; what the planned level of support for agri-environment schemes in 2000-01 and 2001-02 is; whether the current planned level of support for such schemes in 2000-01 and 2001-02 has changed from the level of support planned for this period as at 1 July 1999 and, if so, by how much.

Ross Finnie: The resources granted to agri-environment schemes in 1998-99 were £12.602 million and £18.641 million in 1999-2000. Provision is £20.167 million for 2000-01 and £21.467 million is available for 2001-02. There have been no changes to the planned level of support since 1 July 1999.

Agriculture

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the absence of any formal right of appeal under the Sheep Annual Premium Scheme 1999 may constitute a breach of the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Ross Finnie: The current options available to a farmer to challenge a decision by the Scottish Executive under the Sheep Annual Premium Scheme 1999, or any other agricultural subsidy scheme, include asking for Judicial Review in the Court of Session. Whether Judicial Review provides adequate and full review to comply with the European Convention on Human Rights depends on the applicant’s complaints and the context. The European Court of Human Rights has accepted that the availability of Judicial Review may well be adequate. In any case the Scottish Executive has undertaken to create a new right of challenge for administrative decisions (currently out for consultation), which would complement any rights to Judicial Review and would be sufficient for the purposes of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Agriculture

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether, pursuant to the published letter sent by Commissioner Franz Fischler to Mr Ben Gill, President of the National Farmers’ Union of England and Wales, it will take action under article 87(2)(b) of the Treaty of Rome to ask the European Commission for permission to aid the pig industry in mitigating the additional costs resultant from the BSE crisis.

Ross Finnie: Given that BSE controls apply throughout the UK, it is almost certain that the EU would not approve measures for Scotland alone under article 87(2)(b) of the Treaty. The most significant BSE-related cost borne by the pig industry has been the prohibition of porcine MBM in animal feed. Commissioner Fischler, however, in his letter to Ben Gill queried whether the effects of the BSE crisis could continue to be regarded as exceptional circumstances. Nevertheless, the Scottish Executive, in conjunction with other UK Agriculture Departments, will continue to explore whether there are factors which would meet the State Aid requirements, bearing in mind the need to target those most in need, namely the pig farmers.

Children

Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1O-850 by Mr Jim Wallace on 16 December 1999, what progress has been made in the preparation of a consultation paper for Scotland on the issue of parental chastisement of children.

Mr Jim Wallace: I am pleased to announce, following   my answer to question S1O-850, that the Scottish Executive has today issued a consultation paper covering the law in Scotland on the physical punishment of children. Copies of the consultation document have been placed in the Information Centre.

Culture

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what value it places on the role of Grampian Television in the maintenance of cultural diversity in Scotland.

Rhona Brankin: Grampian Television makes a valuable contribution to the culture of Scotland, particularly of the North of Scotland. Its provision is required to comply with the licence conditions of the Independent Television Commission.

Emergency Services

Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-2666 by Mr Jim Wallace on 3 December 1999, whether it has any plans to provide air support services for other emergency services and, if so, to detail them.

Mr Jim Wallace: The Scottish Ambulance Service already receives funding of some £4 million for the Patient Air Transport Service which it provides. There are no plans to provide air support for the fire service.

Enterprise

Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to encourage local enterprise companies to offer continuing advice to small businesses after they have received grant or loan assistance.

Henry McLeish: The Scottish Executive has regular contact with both Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Scottish Enterprise on the local delivery of business support and other issues. While decisions on support for specific businesses are for the enterprise network, we are keen to improve the quality and consistency of advice available across Scotland, and I hope to announce details of new initiatives soon. In supporting the small business sector it is important to ensure that assistance is tailored to the needs of the business concerned, and that this includes appropriate aftercare arrangements.

  As an example, I understand, the HIE Network operates a structured aftercare programme for all businesses in receipt of Network assistance. This is both to protect the investment of public funds and also to help the continuing development of individual businesses.

Food Safety

Alasdair Morgan (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it intends to review the Over Thirty Months Scheme with regard to agreeing a birth date from which cattle over thirty months old will be allowed to be sold for human consumption.

Ross Finnie: The Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) began a review of the thirty month rule in November 1998. The Committee’s conclusion, announced on 22 December 1999, was that no change should be made at this time as it may reintroduce an unacceptable level of risk. The Committee also recommended that the existing controls continue to be rigorously enforced, but that it will continue to keep the position under review. This advice has been accepted by the Executive.

Fuel Poverty

Mr John McAllion (Dundee East) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it remains its intention to eliminate fuel poverty over two terms of the Parliament.

Mr Frank McAveety: The Executive’s programme is set out in the Programme for Government document. We are committed to a Healthy Homes Initiative which will improve energy efficiency in 100,000 houses by 2003.

Geese

George Lyon (Argyll and Bute) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive in what form it will publish the report and recommendations of the National Goose Forum.

Sarah Boyack: We are today issuing the report as a consultation document because we would like to obtain the views of all interested parties before deciding how the National Goose Forum’s recommendations should be taken forward. We have also arranged for all Goose Forum papers and minutes of meetings – which were previously regarded as confidential to facilitate free and open dialogue within the Forum – to be made available on the Scottish Executive website.

Health

Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive which health boards and NHS Trusts apply charges for services they provide to local hospices.

Susan Deacon: The only item of any significance for which health boards and NHS Trusts apply charges to local hospices relates to pharmaceutical services.

  There is no uniform approach to the way in which hospices’ drug costs are met. The degree to which a health board supports the pharmaceutical element of a hospice’s work is a matter for negotiation between health board and hospice when discussing the terms of their service agreement each year.

Health

Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will detail the number of hospices in Scotland whose NHS funding between 1998-99 and 1999-2000 has increased, remained the same or decreased.

Susan Deacon: NHS funding as a percentage of running costs compared to 1998-99 has increased for four hospices, remained the same for two hospices and decreased for six hospices.

  Total NHS funding for the 12 hospices has increased from £7,289,800 in 1998-99 to £7,921,800 in 1999-2000 which represents a cash increase of 9%.

Health

Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-1266 by Susan Deacon on 14 September 1999, what percentage of funding is currently provided to each hospice in Scotland by health boards in relation to the overall running costs of each hospice.

Susan Deacon: The Scottish Partnership Agency for Palliative and Cancer Care conducts an annual survey of Scottish hospices to monitor the level of NHS funding they receive. With regard to the latest survey, questionnaires were sent to 13 hospices and returns for 1999-2000 were received from 12.

  The percentage of funding currently provided to each hospice in Scotland by health boards in relation to the overall running costs of each hospice is as follows:

  


Health Board

  

Hospice

  

Total Health Board 

  Funding

  

% Revenue Expenditure 

  from Contracts

  



Ayrshire & Arran

  

Ayrshire

  

888,277

  

39

  



Argyll & Clyde

  

Accord

  

372,332

  

35

  


 

Ardgowan

  

347,786

  

31

  


 

St. Vincent’s

  

299,758

  

31

  



Forth Valley

  

Strathcarron

  

927,830

  

40

  



Greater Glasgow

  

Marie Curie Hunters Hill

  

1,038,197

  

40

  


 

Prince & Princess of Wales

  

704,541

  

40

  


 

St. Margaret’s*

  
 
 



Highland

  

Highland

  

384,000

  

32

  



Lanarkshire

  

St. Andrews

  

864,741

  

58

  



Lothian

  

Marie Curie Fairmile

  

876,017

  

42

  


 

St. Columba’s

  

1,105,000

  

36

  



Western Isles

  

Bethesda

  

113,300

  

50

  



TOTAL

  
 

7,921,779

  
 



Av.% revenue cost covered by NHS

  
 
 

40

  



  *No return has been received from St. Margaret’s Hospice.

Higher Education

Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many disabled students have attended courses at university, higher and further education establishments over the last five years.

Henry McLeish: Information on students in higher education institutions in Scotland who have declared a registered or unregistered disability is provided in the table below. This includes all full-time and part-time students regardless of domicile and level of course. Information on disability is not currently collected from students attending further education institutions.

  Table 1: Students with a Disability in Higher Education Institutions in Scotland (HESA statistics)

  

 

1994-95

  

1995-96

  

1996-97

  

1997-98

  

1998-99

  



Total

  

3,402

  

2,774

  

5,556

  

6,220

  

6,787

  



  It is proposed that students attending institutions in Scotland in receipt of the Disabled Students' Allowance paid by the Students Awards Agency for Scotland should be exempt from the Graduate Endowment when the new student support arrangements are introduced in 2001-02. The total numbers in receipt of such an allowance are:

  Table 2: Scottish students in receipt of Disabled Students' Allowance in Scotland in 1998-99 (SAAS statistics)

  


Location of institution 

  

Higher Education 

  Institutions

  

Further Education 

  Institutions

  

Other

  

Total

  



Scotland

  

599

  

219

  

12

  

830

Housing

Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to amend building regulations in relation to the provision of housing for disabled people.

Sarah Boyack: An amendment to the Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations was laid in the Scottish Parliament on 14 December 1999, to come into force on 17 April 2000, introducing substantial new provisions to give disabled people access to new dwellings.

Legislation

Michael Russell (South of Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-1136 by Mr Jim Wallace on 15 September, whether it will now give its full support to the early introduction of a Member’s Bill on leasehold casualties based on the Scottish Law Commission report, as proposed by Mr Adam Ingram, and whether it will ask the Parliamentary Bureau to recommend allocation of the necessary legislative time.

Mr Jim Wallace: The Executive remains committed to the abolition of leasehold casualties and we have indicated that we would be prepared to support Mr Ingram’s Private Member’s Bill. Further work will have to be carried out on the Bill drafted by the Scottish Law Commission to ensure that it is within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. The Deputy Minister for Justice is to meet Mr Ingram to discuss the assistance which the Executive might be able to extend to him.

Police

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton (Lothians) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will make available additional funding to meet the cost for the recruitment of 25 additional police officers as requested by Lothian and Borders Police.

Mr Jim Wallace: It is for Chief Constables, in consultation with their Police Authorities, to determine their staffing priorities within GAE levels. The methodology for the distribution of police GAE in Scotland is currently under review including whether there are special factors within individual force areas that need to be taken into account.

Police

Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what level of financial resources is provided to Central Scotland Police in order to address issues of emergency planning in the Grangemouth refinery area.

Mr Jim Wallace: I refer the Member to the answer I gave to question S1W-3745 .

Refugees

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton (Lothians) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether Glasgow City Council will receive additional grant-aided expenditure funding to deal with the accommodation costs for Kosovo refugees until such time as these costs are reimbursed by the Home Office; whether the Home Office have provided the necessary funds to Glasgow City Council and if not, whether it will make representations to Her Majesty's Government to find out why.

Iain Gray: Proposals for a Special Grant to reimburse Scottish local authorities for additional expenditure incurred in connection with the acceptance of displaced persons from Kosovo under the UNHCR Humanitarian Evacuation Programme were sent to local authorities for consultation on 10 December. The consultation period ended in January.

  We are expecting to lay a Special Grant Report before Parliament on 14 February for this purpose. Subject to parliamentary approval, grants should be paid in the current financial year. The total amount of grant in 1999-2000 is expected to be £4.9 million, and this is being met in full by the Treasury’s UK Reserve.

Refugees

Shona Robison (North-East Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Scottish Parliament will be asked to approve a Special Grant Order removing the legal hurdle which prevents the Home Office paying money to Scottish local authorities.

Iain Gray: We expect to lay two Special Grant Reports before the Scottish Parliament shortly. They will reimburse local authorities in Scotland for the costs they have incurred during 1999-2000 in (a) supporting asylum seekers in Scotland and (b) receiving and housing refugees from Kosovo who arrived in May 1999 under the UN Humanitarian Evacuation Programme. The first report follows in a series of Local Government Finance Reports laid annually before the UK Parliament. The second report is in response to the exceptional needs of the Kosovan Humanitarian Evacuation Programme.

Rural Affairs

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will institute a consultation process as to the way in which the provisions, under article 11.1A of the EC Regulation ((EEC) 3887/92), which relate to the administration of claims under the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) and in particular with regard to an application which "contains errors other than those made intentionally or by serious negligence", are interpreted and, if so, whether it will include in the consultation paper the practice and precedent in other EU member states as to the interpretation of the "obvious error" rule; whether its application of the IACS rules under 11.1A has been strict upon applicants in the imposition of penalties and its interpretation of the "obvious error" rule, and how its application of the IACS rules has compared with the approach adopted by other EU states.

Ross Finnie: All EU Regulations, which impact on producers, were the subject of detailed scrutiny by the Red Tape Review panel of industry representatives. Their report was handed over on 26 January and I am now considering the recommendations. The Panel investigated the perception that the UK over-interprets EC Regulations and applies them more stringently than other member states but concluded this was not the case. The Panel did have a concern about the proportionality of some penalties imposed by the EU Regulations, especially where they are the result of inadvertent error in completing the forms and about the lack of flexibility in the imposition of those penalties. I share these concerns and intend to pursue them with the EU.

Rural Affairs

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to review the regulations governing EU agricultural subsides and whether the existing rules punish cases of inadvertent error.

Ross Finnie: The Regulations governing EU agricultural subsidies are reviewed regularly by Agricultural Departments in the UK on an individual and collective basis. The need for change is also discussed regularly with the EU and the other member states before revisions are introduced. The Regulations are designed to deter fraudulent activity and serious negligence. We do, however, feel that in some instances the penalties imposed by the EU Regulations appear disproportionate, especially where they are applied following inadvertent errors on the forms. We are having ongoing discussion with the EU on this matter, but whilst we have been able to secure some changes to the Regulations to allow acceptance of some errors, we do not feel that these go far enough. We are continuing to pursue the possibility that further discretion should be given to member states.

Sport

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-3107 by Rhona Brankin on 22 December 1999, whether a meeting has been arranged to discuss the issue of community involvement in the ownership of football clubs and whether representatives from Aberdeen Football Club Supporters Association will be invited to attend any such meeting to expand on their initiative on this matter.

Rhona Brankin: I have invited the football authorities in Scotland and the Scottish Federation of Football Supporters to let me have their views in writing by 11 February on the ideas discussed in the Co-operative Party’s pamphlet Mutualism – A Golden Goal? The issue was raised at a meeting Mr Sam Galbraith and I had with these and other bodies on 18 January. At their request, I met Ms Cathy Jamieson MSP, Mike Watson MSP and Mr Joe Hill (Co-operative Party) on 25 January to discuss the issue of supporter involvement in football clubs.

  I have no plans to meet the Aberdeen Football Club Supporters Association or any other group associated with an individual club, but if they or any other bodies or individuals wish to submit views in writing, we would be pleased to consider them.

Student Finance

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton (Lothians) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what legal advice it has had as to whether the Cubie recommendations do or do not breach EU law and whether there is a possibility of the recommendations being legally challengeable.

Henry McLeish: The Scottish Executive has considered the legal implications of the Cubie recommendations. It has concluded that, were these recommendations to be implemented, there would be a serious risk of the UK being held to be in breach of EU law, insofar as these recommendations extended to Scottish domiciled students attending institutions in other parts of the UK. The Executive’s own proposals which have just been announced are accordingly restricted to Scottish and EU students attending institutions in Scotland.

Student Finance

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton (Lothians) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive,  further to the answers to questions S1W-851 and S1W-3472 by Henry McLeish on 5 November 1999 and 11 January 2000 respectively, whether it will lay the Quigley Report before the Parliament and what plans it has for a debate on it.

Henry McLeish: The Quigley Committee's report which is required to be delivered by April 2000 will be placed in the Scottish Parliament at the same time as it is laid before the Westminster Parliament. The Scottish Executive will consider its response when it has received the report.